Slashdot Mirror


Huawei's Equipment Poses 'Significant' Security Risks, UK Says (cnbc.com)

The U.K. government warned on Thursday Huawei's telecommunications equipment raises "significant" security issues, posing a possible setback to the Chinese tech firm as it looks to build out 5G networks. From a report: In 46-page report evaluating Huawei's security risks, British officials stopped short of calling for a ban of Huawei's 5G telecommunications equipment. But the assessment cited "underlying defects" in the company's software engineering and cybersecurity processes, citing "significantly increased risk to U.K. operators." The findings give weight to warnings from U.S. officials who have argued Huawei's networking equipment could be used for espionage by the Chinese government. Huawei has repeatedly said it does not pose any risk and insists it would not share customer data with Beijing. In a statement Thursday, Huawei said it takes the U.K. government's findings "very seriously."

131 comments

  1. Le sigh.... by Syphonius · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And it continues. Even if Huawei earnestly means that they won't collaborate with Beijing, when your engineering security is so lax then it seems reasonable to expect that Beijing will find ways to make use of it (just like any other large government would).

    It's just another example of corporate balances not finding a decent center for security versus productivity and profit. We all still have a long way to go.

    1. Re:Le sigh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      https://www.networkworld.com/article/2223272/60-minutes-torpedoes-huawei-in-less-than-15-minutes.html = there's no believing this company.

    2. Re:Le sigh.... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is just the UK government towing the US line, because in a few weeks it may be rather desperate for a trade deal. No harm in getting the ass-kissing started early.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:Le sigh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      ^ said the always-on China-and-Huawei-apologist, oblivious to the dozens of proven instances of Huawei stealing, spying, poaching and lying... Amijohomo your apology tour for criminal behavior is ill-timed... Trump's still in office...

    4. Re:Le sigh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It's kind of sad how much of a Chinese apologist you are to the point you will even be against your own country.

      If you like China so much why don't you move there?

    5. Re:Le sigh.... by TigerPlish · · Score: 2

      towing the US line

      TOEING the line. As in y'all stand nice and neat toes on the white line so you're all the same.

      "Towing the line makes no sense", and neither does making any business investments in Britain for the next half-decade.

      Brexiters ruined that country, businesses hate FUD more than anything else. All Brexit has done is poison England for business.

      --
      The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
    6. Re:Le sigh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Drink! Amimojo denies reports he doesn't like as fake news, like any right wing nutjob would!

      Second drink as this denial effectively means Amimojo is siding with China, who we all know is a bastion for equality, civil rights, feminism, and all the things rightwingers hate.

      Third drink for denying it in a way that can be done even if Amimojo never read the article or the report it's talking about (again, much like right wingers who can find an excuse to rail about liberals this or SJWs that in almost any story, without reading the story). Brexit bad! Orange man bad!

      Speaking of Brexit, another drink for dragging Brexit in to a story not about Brexit. Yet another similarity to right wingers who can tie almost anything back to their pet conspiracy theory.

      And one last drink to his conspiracy theory as being easily debunked if one reads the story. See, the report is from the Huawei Cyber Security Evaluation Centre Oversight Board (a watchdog created between GCHQ and Huawei). They've been doing these assessment for several years, and they have raised concerns to Huawei before, with the current report saying that Huawei hasn't addressed them. So this isn't some sudden change to kiss ass. Not to sound like a parrot, but AGAIN a similarity between Amimojo and right wing nutjobs.

    7. Re:Le sigh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Towing a line" does in fact make sense, the problem is that's not the phrase. Brexit hasn't happened yet, they may still unfuck themselves... maybe. Brexit obviously like Trump was a Russian influence campaign directly.

      And it worked. Russia's FUD was obviously underestimated over the last decade. Nigel Farage should be strung up at the gallows.

    8. Re:Le sigh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meanwhile in the real world the UK economy out performs the EU economy in growth. Fairy tales are for children.

    9. Re:Le sigh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you like China so much why don't you move there?

      Why would China want him? China doesn't exactly have the most lenient immigration policy. You need to offer some real benefit to Chinese society for them to let you be a citizen.

      Oh and they don't accept dual citizenship. If you want Chinese citizenship, you have to given up your other ones.

    10. Re:Le sigh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually? They're both growing almost exactly the same right now, ignoring the pending Brexit anyway. Where'd you get your BS fact from, I'm curious? Both had ~1.8% last quarter.

      *(Don't lie, Kendall, Bill, you'll only die tired)

    11. Re: Le sigh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They would put him in a concentration camp immediately. If only the UK had the balls...

    12. Re:Le sigh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Say no to Huawei... please world governments. Let's get this one right.

    13. Re:Le sigh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Why would China want him?" = Useful propaganda idiot, speaks English, knows how to set up slashdot account... 3 reasons right there? They need disposable morons like ^ for their campaigns.

    14. Re:Le sigh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Useful propaganda idiot, speaks English, knows how to set up slashdot account

      Those are dime a dozen skills. Not worth paying a citizenship for. Not even worth an H1B visa (or the closest Chinese equivalent)

    15. Re:Le sigh.... by RockDoctor · · Score: 0

      Brexiters ruined that country, businesses hate FUD more than anything else. All Brexit has done is poison England for business.

      The really annoying thing is that Brexit is in the process of fucking England (which voted, marginally, for it) and Scotland (which voted against it). And it's likely to cause Ireland problems too - but the EU will be trying to mitigate those problems.

      Britain =/= England, in the same way that there are, apparently, some people in America didn't vote for the Tangerine Shitgibbon.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    16. Re:Le sigh.... by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Toeing the line, but not as in standing nice and neat so you're all the same.

      The line is the rule that you're not supposed to cross. "Toeing the line" means you're trying to get as close as you can to breaking the rule, without breaking it.

      If they were toeing the line for the US, that means they're just barely complying with demands that they didn't really want to follow.

      If they were trying to be nice and neat just the same as everybody like a good boy, they'd be standing well back from the line, following the intent of the rule. You don't follow the intent of the rule at the edge; the recommended best practices will always be well back from the lines.

    17. Re:Le sigh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      As always, you are 100% wrong and stupid.

      The UK and the US are basically joined at the hip when it comes to intelligence sharing. Contrary to what cretins like you think, the UK is an absolute world titan when it comes to sigint, humint and analysis. Whether that's good or bad is another matter... but the fact remains that the decision by the UK isn't based on Brexit (you short-sighted fucking halfwit). It's based on protecting extremely valuable shared assets.

    18. Re:Le sigh.... by TigerPlish · · Score: 2

      Toe the line's always been about conformity / uniformity. I learned it in the military, and before that in school. "Line up, toes on the line"

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Dunno what word to use to express your sentiment. Pushing the limit?

      --
      The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
    19. Re:Le sigh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If there's one lesson we should have digested from Snowden, it is that every piece of telecoms equipment "poses significant security risks".

      The question is, whether Huawei's are more "significant" than anyone else's

    20. Re:Le sigh.... by Gonoff · · Score: 1

      ...in a few weeks it may be rather desperate for a trade deal

      You may be under a false impression. WE really REALLY do not want the deal that President Donald Fart is offering us where we have to drop everything from food standards to the NHS before we can take goods from his rich friends and their servants.

      --
      I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
  2. Another explanation by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And it continues. Even if Huawei earnestly means that they won't collaborate with Beijing, when your engineering security is so lax then it seems reasonable to expect that Beijing will find ways to make use of it (just like any other large government would).

    It's just another example of corporate balances not finding a decent center for security versus productivity and profit. We all still have a long way to go.

    With all this calling out of Huwei, it sounds suspiciously like the US security agencies found a specific back-door planted in the products, want to alert everyone to the issue, but also don't want to make the vulnerability public so they can use it for themselves.

    1. Re:Another explanation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      In actuality it is the opposite. Huawei won't install the back doors the 3 letter agencies use on its hardware.

    2. Re:Another explanation by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Nah, it sounds like Huawei holds most of the patents on 5G infrastructure and is years ahead of everyone else getting hardware to market. So now all the US companies that make similar equipment are losing contracts to Huawei, so the government decided to help them out by raising some "security concerns".

      It's the least they could do after the NSA was caught red handed systematically backdooring Cisco hardware.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:Another explanation by BringsApples · · Score: 3, Insightful

      China has a dictator government, so everything in China is owned by it's government, at least from the government's perspective. Everything tech, from China, should be evaluated.

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    4. Re:Another explanation by TigerPlish · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      It's the least they could do after the NSA was caught red handed systematically backdooring Cisco hardware.

      You know, espionage requires that sometimes you tap peoples' lines, steam their mail open, and r00t their routers.

      If NSA did that to everybody indiscrimnately, boo, bad agency.

      If they did to enemies of the USA, or friends of enemies of the USA, then more power to them.

      It's dirty business but it has to be done.

      Are you going to argue that a country should take zero steps to protect itself?

      --
      The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
    5. Re:Another explanation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Nah, it sounds like Huawei holds most of the patents on 5G infrastructure and is years ahead of everyone else getting hardware to market.

      5G doesn't exist yet. It's a marketing term for now, just like what happened to 3G and LTE. We have discussed this at length before this fiasco started.

      It's the least they could do after the NSA was caught red handed systematically backdooring Cisco hardware.

      Red handed? Tailored access operations tailors access to any equipment whatsoever. They intercepted Cisco hardware, modified it, and sent it on it's way. If you think that can't be done or isn't being done to any hardware manufacturer who has a customer the NSA has an interest in, you are beyond helping.

      It's time to put down the politics and look at the world of facts and reason.

    6. Re: Another explanation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      They did it to everyone. Literally every American citizen was tracked by the Obama NSA.

      Assholes like you sniveled and whined for years calling it a nut job conspiracy, right up to the proof that it's exactly what they were doing... And now here you are, a few years later, whining and sniveling again.

      Wipe the fucking government cum off your lips, slave.

    7. Re:Another explanation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Got proof shit-head?

    8. Re: Another explanation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Literally every American citizen was tracked by the Obama NSA." = A lie from an uninformed idiot who knows nothing about Thinthread, Xkeyscore, irate-monkeys, any of it.

      META data was collected for pattern analysis, it was collected anyway. That was not all "mined" and no, you were not even aware of it at the time - BECAUSE IT HAD NO REPERCUSSIONS FOR YOU.

      That's not the case with China's industrial state-owned spying apparatus. Go see the inside of a Chinese prison for proof, you idiot.

    9. Re:Another explanation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't make any sense. If your theory is correct, why would they be actively discouraging use of the equipment?

    10. Re:Another explanation by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      "We got computers, we're tapping phone lines I know that that ain't allowed We dress like students, we dress like housewives Or in a suit and a tie I changed my hairstyle, so many times now I don't know what I look like!"

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    11. Re:Another explanation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My backdoor for Americans ... Huawei backdoors for chi.coms .... sounds like the proper (non-globalist) balance of tecko-azzfucking. Unless of-course the Trotsky-slut DemoRats win in 2020. Then we'll all be tyranated slants.

    12. Re:Another explanation by Aighearach · · Score: 2

      There are two European companies already selling competing hardware.

      You've already been informed of that in other threads, can you please dial down the stupid at least 2 notches?

    13. Re:Another explanation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Retard detected.

    14. Re:Another explanation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny how you can readily accept that the US government forced US companies to backdoor their hardware, but the idea that the Chinese government would force a Chinese company to backdoor their products is some sort of conspiracy theory?

    15. Re:Another explanation by Gonoff · · Score: 1

      ...enemies of the USA, or friends of enemies of the USA...

      Do you mean enemies of the USA or enemies of your rulers? The two are very different.

      Just because someone loathes the people who think they have a divine right to control your country without you knowing who they all are, does not mean they are hostile to you or your country. I'm not talking about your weird far right, your "militias" or even your religious fundamentalists. You saw an example of "control" before your last election when one person was stopped from running and someone less likely was told she could.

      The trouble with truth is that we have been trained to reject it as a conspiracy theory.

      --
      I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
    16. Re:Another explanation by Rolgar · · Score: 1

      Specifically Ericson and Nokia? From investment info regarding 5G I'm reading, those are the only two companies that can sell 5G gear in the US.

  3. I'm curious by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How does it compare to the competition? It's not like there's been too much of a stellar privacy and security conscious record in the whole industry...

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:I'm curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Absolutely. And I'd be cautious about a 46 pages report on security flaws that has less than 3 pages devoted to the actual findings, none of which are listed explicitly beyond broad general lax coding and version control, or even described in terms of potential harm or attacks.

      I remember the Nortel DMS switches that had more than 20000 implementations of the search function, because no one could touch the code and/or fully comprehend it. Anyone raised issues at the time?

      Let's just state plain simple that 5G is too much of a strategic technology to allow for a dependence on a foreign country, let alone one you do not consider an ally, and that you need to protect locally-built products to avoid the dependence. Airbus, defense, and other industries are in the same situation. Why be hypocrite about it when it comes to 5G?

  4. We can't trust China..??? REALLY?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Told ya' so." -- America

  5. Buy US gear by anonieuweling · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Buy US gear because then the US can use them backdoors in there.
    Chinese gear has no US-compatible backdoors.

    1. Re:Buy US gear by kenai_alpenglow · · Score: 2

      What is a "compatible backdoor"? I'm sure the US, if they know about it, can exploit it. I'm also sure that China has backdoors in it. Why would we expect a communist dictatorship know for industrial espionage NOT to put them in?

    2. Re:Buy US gear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can you tell when Chi-Com dogeater apologist faggots are lying? A: Observe their mouths moving, they have no honor in their entire cultural history.

    3. Re:Buy US gear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is a "compatible backdoor"?

      Whatever the NSA used to listen in on Angela Merkel's phone calls.

    4. Re:Buy US gear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      = a sig/int operation, not a backdoored consumer device. America's intel apparatus keeps tabs on things worldwide. What it doesn't do is lock up a million Uighurs for their ethnicity and censor all criticism, dissent.

      Nice try Chi-Com.

    5. Re:Buy US gear by satsuke · · Score: 3, Informative

      Which US gear are you referring to?

      Nokia is Nokia-Alcatel-Lucent, not sure which is dominant, other than Nokia is Norway, Alcatel was French
      Ericsson is Sweden
      Samsung is Korean

      That's most of your LTE infrastructure vendors, and all are not US based.

    6. Re:Buy US gear by Parker+Lewis · · Score: 1

      Cisco?

    7. Re:Buy US gear by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      other than Nokia is Norway

      Nokia was Finnish, not Norwegian. They don't even speak languages in the same language group.

      Then some bunch of Americans brought it, made it into a laughing stock, and ... does it still actually exist in a meaningful sense?

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    8. Re:Buy US gear by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      For a US 5G supplier you can try to go to HP, but the work is really being done by a German partner company.

    9. Re:Buy US gear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Progressives wish they could do that though.

    10. Re:Buy US gear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Strictly speaking, Swedish is an official language in Finnland (in some areas even the only language spoken) and is closely related to Norwegian.
      Not that I see why it would matter, Norway is still a different country from Finnland and speaking the same language (kind of) does not make Germany, Austria and Switzerland interchangeable either.

    11. Re:Buy US gear by microbox · · Score: 1

      The intelligence services in the USA will intercept the shipping of a product of a specific individual to install hardware backdoors. They aren't installed on literally every device, because the devices are made by private firms.

      --

      Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
    12. Re:Buy US gear by microbox · · Score: 1

      Something like 90% of Finland speak Finnish. It's completely different to Swedish or Norwegian.

      --

      Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
    13. Re:Buy US gear by strikethree · · Score: 1

      That's most of your LTE infrastructure vendors, and all are not US based.

      That is what happens when you rest on your laurels after dominating the entire world. Maybe Americans should be looking at creating new fields to farm rather than staying stuck 50 years in the past trying to squeeze the maximum amount of money of what existed then?

      It is almost like the Apollo Program was the last big hurrah and everything after that has just been harvesting the results... and it is ending. The resources are drying up. In a few more decades, America will be no more special than the UK or Portugal despite both being world powers at one point or another.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
  6. British dossiers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Distortion...

  7. My Solution by AlanObject · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If I were driving Hauwei at this point I would open-source all the software running on my devices. Their competitive edge is in slave-labor manufacturing and insane levels of customer financing, not technical innovation.

    Of course they would still have to address the possibility of silicon or FPGA based backdoors but that might be worked out in a similar way.

    1. Re:My Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't open source software you stole, silly. They would be blacklisted everywhere. The shitty parts of the code are the parts they were forced to write themselves to attach to code they don't understand...because everything else is obviously stolen.

    2. Re:My Solution by Cid+Highwind · · Score: 1

      But then the inevitable patent infringements would be exposed, and the west would have actual legal reasons to ban Huawei gear instead of all this vague talk about "security risks".

      --
      0 1 - just my two bits
    3. Re:My Solution by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Not only that, Huawei is accused of stealing tech from other companies. Unless Huawei extensively rewrites the code, someone from the Cisco, for example, is going to notice that their proprietary drivers are in Huawei’s open source code.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    4. Re:My Solution by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      If I were driving Hauwei at this point I would open-source all the software running on my devices.

      You would be executed for corruption. Literally.

    5. Re:My Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are ahead of the competition in 5G. Not by that much, but still around 1 year. At least enough that there isn't really anyone to perform industrial espionage on. They are also not that much of a low-cost vendor anymore, unless in very commodity items such as business switches and routers (lets say the low to medium end cisco portfolio). The major benefit is that their tech was mostly developed in the 2000's and 2010's, as such it is much more modern and easy to use (simple ethernet interfaces versus proprietary things, a lot running on standard servers, ...)

    6. Re:My Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I were driving Tesla at this point I would open-source all the software running on my devices. Their competitive edge is in slave-labor manufacturing and insane levels of customer financing, not technical innovation.

      Of course they would still have to address the possibility of silicon or FPGA based backdoors but that might be worked out in a similar way.

      FTFY
      Hey ElonObjectInMyAnus, aren't you that Musk cocksucker that said Elon did nothing wrong with his "funding secured" tweet?
      Get Tesla open-sourced so "Autopilot" can be fixed to not drive into cross traffic trailers, road dividers, fire trucks...and dispense with frivolous lawsuits about former employees stealing source code.

    7. Re:My Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only do they work harder, and have more, cheaper, resources, but they do hold a majority of the IP, which spells a lot to how advanced they are compared to the rest of the world and their competition. So yes, low cost and many resources help, but it is time to recognize that the turtle is beating the rabbit to the finish line.

  8. Alternatives by Meneth · · Score: 1

    So if Huawei is compromised by the Chinese government because it is based in China, who could compromise the other network equipment manufacturers? According to Wikipedia:

    Avaya, Cisco, Hewlett Packard, Juniper, Motorola, and Qualcomm: USA.

    Ericsson: Sweden.

    Fujitsu and NEC: Japan.

    Nokia: Finland.

    ZTE: China.

    It seems ZTE is similarly disliked by the US government, while the others are either American or controlled by US allies.

    1. Re:Alternatives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "because it is based in China" = Not the focus. Because it is wholly owned by the Chinese Communist Party and operated by Chinese military officers to deliberately obtain intel for their APT hacking operations. Pay attention.

      Huawei certainly is NOT the only Chinese company that has been both proven and accused of doing this. Reading is key. National origin is "of concern" but that's not 100 or 1:1 what is being discussed, nor why.

      The history of these individual companies is not something you can just whitewash by national origin, and that goes for the US companies you listed too. I wouldn't trust them without verification and formal analysis.

      The difference? China's government puts a million people in prison based on their ethnicity alone, or whether they smile at facial recognition cameras. The US government uses data to thwart hacking attacks originating in China.

      You decide which is reasonable by your own criteria, but if you choose Chinese prison, go there and experience it first please.

    2. Re:Alternatives by microbox · · Score: 1

      Big businesses in China are essentially wings of the communist party. By analogy, it would be like if the GOP owned and controlled 90% of US manufacturing. Not the US government. The GOP. And it would also be like the GOP controlled the entire military, and the military is sword to the President. Not he country. The president. Just like in Nazi Germany.

      China has large parts under military occupation, and massive camps full of prisoners of conscious. Like if the GOP rounded up large segments of the population, put them in interment camps, and then harvested their organs for profit.

      It's really a great place.

      --

      Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
  9. US lap dog barks on command by bradley13 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Remember when the UK supported the US fantasy of WMD in Iraq?

    The US says "jump". The UK government asks "how high?"

    --
    Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
    1. Re:US lap dog barks on command by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're going to go back ~25 years to reference the fact that the US did in fact find banned chemical weapons in Iraq, and this helps Huawei's proven dozens of crimes how exactly, moron? Learn to read "bradley"

      https://www.networkworld.com/article/2223272/60-minutes-torpedoes-huawei-in-less-than-15-minutes.html = there's no believing this company.

    2. Re:US lap dog barks on command by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The truth that told the lie - no WMDs found.
      Aside from the chemical weapons that were in fact found in Iraq, there also was a nuclear weapons program being developed. But the important fact here is that the original Iraq war was a pre-emptive war, to stop Hussein BEFORE he was able to build a nuclear weapon. Of course there were no nuclear WMDs found, because the war was intended to stop them from gaining that capability.

    3. Re:US lap dog barks on command by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AGAIN, WMD'S WERE FOUND. You need to be specific if you want to play pedant. They didn't find a NUCLEAR program as alleged, as Blix said didn't exist, and as Cheney pushed to "establish" - that you might reference.

      WMD's however WERE FOUND. So it's just unintelligent to attack it as you did generally, your premise was false. (None of what I said supports the wars btw)

      "there also was a nuclear weapons program being developed." = False. Hans Blix correctly gauged that there was no renewed nuclear program, and that was borne out after the invasion years later.

      Cheney used the plausibility of such a program to attack - for the actual reasons he wanted to do so - which includes Saudi and Israeli interests on top of the US's economic/oil machination strategies.

      AGAIN THOUGH, NONE OF THESE REFERENCES HELPS HUAWEI IN ANY REAL-WORLD WAY. The Bush admin has been THOROUGHLY rebuked for that, it's easily the #1 taint on that administration's record.

      Just because the US has done bad things, and I fully agree they have, that doesn't absolve or lend credibility to Huawei IN THE SLIGHTEST, especially after you read the first thing of the dozens of crimes they're proven guilty of.

    4. Re:US lap dog barks on command by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The WMD's that were found were US WMD's. The reason that the US knew they were there was that it was the US who sold them those weapons in order to support the "puppet dictator" that the US installed.

    5. Re:US lap dog barks on command by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1
      Remember when Mueller lied us into the Iraq War? Here's video evidence of him lying to Congress.

      He gave the impression that the FBI, the trusted organization that would never lie, approved of the invasion as absolutely necessary. Because Iraq was going to give WMD to Al-Qaeda, despite Saddam utterly hating Islamists and Al-Qaeda utterly hating nationalists like Saddam.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    6. Re:US lap dog barks on command by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

      Who said jump when? The report talks about a process working with Huawei going back many years to mitigate various concerns they have about the underlying architecture. There is no discussion of incidents or any specific vulnerability. It is mainly about Huawei's use of a third party realtime OS that is out of general support (Huawei purchased a separate long term support agreement) and their continued use of single user space on different set of devices.

      --
      This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
    7. Re:US lap dog barks on command by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks Clinton.

      "I love fucking womins and sellin guns!" - Bill Clinton

    8. Re: US lap dog barks on command by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still parroting this lie. Some idiots never learn. Cite please, or you're just a liar like your neocon masters.

  10. Go with Huawei by PPH · · Score: 1

    warnings from U.S. officials

    Because Chinese lap dogs are cuter than British.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Go with Huawei by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chinese lap dogs are not just cuter but also tastier.

  11. Open Your Backdoor To Everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    US kit was developed by a few engineers from the US but mostly immigrants/HB2s from India, China, UAE, etc., with source and schematics stored on networks run by Somali and Nigerian admins.
    Huawei kit was developed by engineers from China.
    So do you want you network kit to be hackable by everyone or just China?

    That said, the Chinese kit was probably built using schematics and source stolen from US companies so it is probably hackable by everyone as well.
    Captcha: betrayed

  12. UK should just join the USA. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They have been the mole and lapdog of the US in the EU since the beginning.
    Always demanding special treatment, always vetoing decisions with its extra-special veto power.

    So much so, that I think the Brexit would actually be a pro-EU thing. ;)

    So now Trump got them to toe the line. Probably by finding (or "finding") some dirt.

    Let's see if the rest of the EU stays strong and says "no", like they recently said for the very first time, thanks to Trump, or if there's dirt on them too.

    It would be funny, if they used actual proven spying on Merkel's phone, to get her to back banning Huawei for alleged spying. ^^

    Oh and dear Americans: This criticism goes solely against those parts ofthe US people, that harm us. Not against you. In fact, those same people harm most of you just as much from what I can tell.

  13. Re:No evidence of government sponsered espionage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cisco is not directly tied to a dictatorship government that requires obedience, and will pass any and all stolen information directly to their military for use against anyone and everyone.

  14. Western tech poses a threat to china by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's all bad.

  15. Jup, it does. Just like all other. by gweihir · · Score: 2

    Anybody thinking they can buy non-compromised telco equipment is kidding themselves. That is why anybody with a clue insists on end-to-end encryption and is aware that it is obvious who talks to whom to the usual creeps (NSA, GCHQ, etc...)

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    1. Re:Jup, it does. Just like all other. by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Anybody thinking they can buy non-compromised telco equipment is kidding themselves. That is why anybody with a clue insists on end-to-end encryption and is aware that it is obvious who talks to whom to the usual creeps (NSA, GCHQ, etc...)

      Wait, which of those are the Swedes, again?

  16. Prove it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Again, not all "creeps listening in" are EQUAL. China's APT groups want to destroy and destabilize the west, Europe, all of it. If the NSA listens in on you, unless you're a terrorist suspect already, nothing will happen.

    When China targets millions of people just for their ethnicity alone, that's not the same thing now is it? Stop equivocating and obfuscating.

  17. Cisco and CIA by Masarand · · Score: 1

    I guess that it's best to stick with Cisco then. Can't imagine that any of their kit would report back to CIA?!

    1. Re:Cisco and CIA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many times have you or anyone you know been harassed, imprisoned, beaten, or disappeared by CIA? Hmm? Since you want to make a comparison to the Chinese Communist Party, let's do that.

      I've got about a million Uighurs who were born not-Han-Chinese and had "wrongthink" religions (any.. ChiComs are threatened by ANY religion) who collectively say you're an unrealistically whining cunt...

  18. Where is the comparison of Cisco/etcs practices? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stating that Huawei has significant shortcomings is fine, but it can have a VERY detrimental effect if you don't also review the same facts for all their available competitors in the same space.

    Who else is producing 5g infrastructure hardware today? Motorola? Cisco? Someone else? What are their security practices like? Is it more or less secure using single or multivendor rollouts? How will it be handled if not using huawei's equipment causes similar security shortcomings with another country who finds it economically advantageous to hack/screw them? Oracle and Juniper have both been intentionally backdoored, so even if Huawei is insecure at this time, are the alternatives really any better? Maybe it is time to force ALL infrastructure software to be open source and well documented, so purchasing nations can bugfix, secure, or audit the code publicly themselves.

  19. Raise your hand by hackingbear · · Score: 1

    The new U.K. government said it "does not believe that the defects identified are a result of Chinese state interference." Instead, it blamed "poor software engineering" and a lack of "cybersecurity hygiene." In other words, Huawei's networks could be exploited by a "range of actors," not just the Chinese government.

    Raise your hand if you have not made a single bug in your career. Raise your hand if you know of any software company having zero bug or defect.

    1. Re:Raise your hand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is not about bugs.
      This is about having 10s of copies of the same code and no system to manage it.
      This is about not having a clue what other products you need to patch when a security issue is found because you have no clue which other products copied the same code.
      (not mentioned to this case, but applying to competitors like Cisco: not having a clue and so little control about your code that people copy 1000s of lines of LGPL'd code into your proprietary code and the product still gets shipped)
      Sure, bugs happen. The above however are "we can't be bothered to even try to do a good job" issues.

  20. Re: Amimojo is a Marxist not right winger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You must be new here or simply insane if you are so far to Amimojos left that you would go there.

  21. UK also says that Saddam Hussein has chemical weap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    UK always says whatever the cousins ask form them.
    I just wonder what the Huawei story is really about. I am sure it is money and power but the details are probably very juicy.

  22. What US Companies? by Koreantoast · · Score: 4, Informative

    One flaw with your analysis: there are almost no US companies that make similar equipment. At most, you have a Cisco or something that produces a small subsegment of the Huawei portfolio. Even the Pentagon, when talking about 5G, essentially says that the only alternatives are European suppliers like Ericsson or Nokia.

    1. Re:What US Companies? by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Why the rush to 5G? If security is that big of a concern, then wait it out. Don't rush to market just to roll out dubious hardware.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    2. Re:What US Companies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This has more to do with the routers, etc. used for 5G. It has to do with chips that use the 5G standard. Imagine if all phones pretty much were using Chinese 5G chips, because Chinese 5G became the "standard" around the world. Previously with 4G there was a similar problem, except back then China was in the lead, and came to the 4G table late. It was pretty costly for them.

    3. Re:What US Companies? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      That's what I said. Huawei are years ahead, US companies don't have their 5G infrastructure hardware out yet.

      There are some European players but they are not all that competitive with what Huawei is offering right now.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:What US Companies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because it has more G's!!!! I can't wait until we have 10G's. That's the best G we can get!

    5. Re:What US Companies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if it Huawei was a Russian company? Would you be saying the same thing? Doubtful. I don't think we should use infrastructure equipment from any country not closely aligned with ours. That would be foolish at best.

    6. Re: What US Companies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am still trying to find that 1G! The SPOT right there

  23. Re:No evidence of government sponsered espionage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The US only warned about security risk from Huawei equipment.
    They did NOT say that their equipment was more secure.
    They did NOT say to buy their equipment instead.
    Furthermore the European states do not single out Huawei. They do put all competitors under the same scrutiny.
    This of course makes your statement a nonsensical deflection also known as Russian logic.

  24. Here's the thing - FUD. by MindPrison · · Score: 2

    We don't have any proof of it, but we can assume that ALL governments have some kind of "deals" with any major hardware maker, and if they don't want to play ball with who we call our "friends" today, then they're the evil ones, as always.

    Huawei is only being targeted because they're so big, and it's a Chinese manufacturer, and a real threat to Apple and other major players elsewhere. It's a dirty game, but they're playing it against them because the "why not" factor, it's a dirty political game, nothing new - but consider the following, in case it was true:

    Almost every component known to man, is being produced in China these days, complete chips - take the ever so popular ESP8266, ESP 32 and many other all-in-one chips that provide complete communication solutions, these chips are found inside millions of devices ALL over the world, and could very easily sport a back-door or two to sniff on the networks they serve (I'm in NO WAY accusing them of this), but if you were to point out someone just because they're an apparent product that everyone knows, you'd target the most obvious one that is known and popular with the population.

    Nothing of this means that ANYONE have implemented backdoor technology that's widely available to any government, we KNOW of the ME inside the INTEL processors, and yet they're basically everywhere, also in China - so why don't we hear a public uproar against that then? Because we're the good guys? Says who?

    You can pretty much assume that any mass produced hardware can be abused in one way or another, whether that was intended or not, that's an entirely different debate. I'm just getting SO sick and tired of these political FUD games that should be SO apparent to ANYONE thinking about it for just more than a few minutes. Stop buying into the FUD, buy what you want - and be smart about your personal safety instead.

    If you truly want to know - get god at it, learn to code, learn to reverse engineer, get knowledge instead of walking into a cloud of populist hearsay, fake news and whatnot.

    --
    What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
  25. UK govt says ... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

    Anything, and it is tainted by the rest of the utter shit that is going on with the mess that is parliament.

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  26. the wolf says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Huawei's Equipment Poses 'Significant' Security Risks, said the wolf

  27. Actually, all your shit comes factory, pre-hack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Huawei's equipment poses a 'significant threat' but so does all other hardware you asshats want to kvetch over.

    There are certain folk with a specific set of skills able to utilize the vulnerabilities in all your hardware in order to bypass the state press.

    Currently the state press is the control factor that keeps the people in the dark about the great sins of their own nations.

    Let's introduce malware to this scenario. Now you statist fucks have ZERO control over the messaging. Instead, people like me do.

    I know you are like children, a bunch of fucking morons, while people like me ensure this shit show stays together. But I've had just about enough of your low level games. Let's increase the stakes. I call you bluff. Make your move.

  28. Huawei gear is ALREADY ubiquitous by peppepz · · Score: 1

    A lot of the critical telecommunication infrastructure is already made up of Huawei products (TLC hardware, networking equipment, end-user phones and modems), and has been since the 2000s. Huawei could already spy the heck out of us if this were their secret mission. I don't understand why it's only now, with 5G tenders in sight, that they've become a problem.

    1. Re:Huawei gear is ALREADY ubiquitous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's because America has finally realized China is overtaking them.
      They're wrong though. China overtook them quite a while ago.
      Chinese infrastructure is being created even faster than American infrastructure is crumbling.

    2. Re:Huawei gear is ALREADY ubiquitous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the UK, Huawei has been used extensively by BT. The report that was released yesterday
      was not specifically commenting on Huawei actively putting in backdoors. The issues were
      that Huawei's software development and quality control are seriously compromised. There
      were lots of security holes in their products and it was not possible to tell whether they were
      deliberately inserted or just there due to incompetence. We keep hearing how Huawei is so
      far ahead, yet now we hear that they must spend billions of US$/Yuan over a multi-year period
      to fix their leaky software and messed up internal processes. Part of the problem seems to be
      that Huawei always wanted to say 'Yes' whenever a Client asks for some customization. As a
      result there isnt really a 'product' per se, just a whole load of incompatible implementations. So
      what's the baseline product? is there one? how can the security audits really tell whether a
      backdoor exists when the product keeps changing, new releases keep popping up with new
      security holes because of Huawei's crap internal processes....

      Honestly speaking, Huawei has a whole array of issues. I think Western countries do need to
      be very careful with them, because even if the security holes are not intentional, they are still
      holes and can be abused. It has been a consistent long term problem with them, and as the
      report says, there is no clear path to a resolution. That's a huge red flag.

      There is one irony in all this. Since Huawei is widely used in other countries, including China,
      that means those places can all be hacked with ease and at scale by the NSA and GCHQ.
      I'm not sure whether China cares about that, but probably they should.

  29. Finally by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    Looks like US intel world is sharing with our allies. Long past time to show the many backdoor that Chinese companies are leaving in.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Finally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yer a dumbass! If there were backdoors, they would've been revealed long ago -- just like the ones Cisco, Juniper and other American manufacturers put in their equipment.

    2. Re: Finally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey dumbass. Intelligence communities do not like to tell you what they know, esp when you are a fuckstick.

  30. [Undesirable company] poses risk, says [state] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, the UK, which is allied with the US against China, makes a nebulous claim without any concrete evidence (AFAIK) smearing a company based in the rival country. I am _so_ convinced!

  31. NOW you want proof? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What happened to proof when you gobbled up the Kum Aid of your owner and thinking prompter?

    The US is literally spying on ALL the things, and openly and proudly brags about it. So it is amazing, how they still manage to keep up your anticonspiracy theorist reality distortion bubble. Murica, Number One! ;)

  32. Neiter did you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not OP here.

    I *did* read them. Yes, it was metadata. And no, you're still wrong, because metadata is actually much more useful than content. You're trying to find patterns.
    If they wanted content, any old NSL would do. Rubber-stamped by the FISA. Accepted by the government. Cause when you got dirt on everyerone ...
    But not that it was necessary. Employees just spied on their spouses, love interests, etc, since nobody would exactly ask why you'd spy on person x.

    Oh, and the rule is that if somebody is a direct target, everybody up to three people removed from him, would get the extended metadata tracking package. That's just about everyone in the US, for your information.

    And that's only the NSA!
    GCHQ/FiveEyes did of course spy on all US citizens too, as their job. And then shared it with the NSA. Useful workaround, no?

    This is just what I remember in under 5 minutes without looking anything up.

    So fuck off, anticonspiracy theorist terrorist. You're a traitor to this country, just like the NSA whose human toilet gimp you are.

  33. Thing is by CptLoRes · · Score: 1

    If we look past minor details like you know, the lack of any proof of security breaches. If it came down to it, I think I'd rather want to send my data to China then the US...

  34. You are literally defending totalitarianism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Congratulations. List all the evil things "your" enemy is. And you have a list what "you" are too.

    If the Nazis still were in power, you'd argu pro racism, pro eugenics and pro concentration camps. Just with the polarity flipped. And just as extreme and evil.
    Hell, I bet you still do!

    I see no difference. "Sneaky psychopathic totalitarian assholes that spy on everyone to get leverage amd total control to abuse them and leech on them" fits both the US and Chinese masters.

    1. Re: You are literally defending totalitarianism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not 'if' rather 'when'. They were doing such.
      And today they lock kids into cages and turn blind eyes to sexual assaults theirof.
      The cretins never went away, they simply hid until the swamp was ripe again.

  35. Proven wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WindBourne gets told 'secret info' all the time by his 'unnamed sources'. and he's the biggest 'fuckstick' around.

  36. That's retarded logic at best. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they found the backdoor and want to use it. It's better for them if everyone has one.
    It's more likely they can't put their NSA backdoors in and are having a hissy fit because of it.

  37. WindBourne can't understand the report obviously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try reading for once silly boy. At least the summary this time.

  38. riiiight by sad_ · · Score: 1

    "But the assessment cited "underlying defects" in the company's software engineering and cybersecurity processes"

    And software engineering and security processes are so much better at Cisco, nobody has ever found a backdoor or hard coded password in any of their devices.

    --
    On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
  39. Ah the old out of context quotes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ah the old out of context quotes appearing in an article specifically designed to make a product or service look bad. The only thing ever reported on Huawei is negative hyperbole. When are we going to see anything on substance. i.e how does this equipment compare to other competing equipment, I am guessing it is all predominantly the same, which is why even though the security review didn't come up roses neither did any of the competing product lines from other vender's.

    The US Government has worked for years to get backdoors in to telco equipment, we can't have people installing equipment that doesn't have NSA backdoors in it now can we.